and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to [#permalink]
25 Aug 2008, 10:12

1

This post receivedKUDOS

11

This post wasBOOKMARKED

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

29%(02:18) correct
71%(01:46) wrong based on 529 sessions

Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.

couldn't be D, the actions were "conditional on simuptaneous (I'm assuming simultaneous) action taken by the other countries," hence, all the countries would comply at the same time and the start signal for one is the start signal for all of them. I'm going with C, because if one country does not comply, then the other six countries have "well-founded excuses, based on the provision, for their own lack of compliance." meaning that if one doesn't pull the trigger the other six don't have to, becuase the actions are conditional on the simultaneous action of the other six countries in the treaty, which is one possibility that "the simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open."

Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simuptaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simuptaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

a) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty

b) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required

c) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance

d) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action

e) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.

C seems like the only answer that would satisfy this weird treaty. Each country will wait for the other six to complete the action and notify it. This will never happen.

couldn't be D, the actions were "conditional on simuptaneous (I'm assuming simultaneous) action taken by the other countries," hence, all the countries would comply at the same time and the start signal for one is the start signal for all of them. I'm going with C, because if one country does not comply, then the other six countries have "well-founded excuses, based on the provision, for their own lack of compliance." meaning that if one doesn't pull the trigger the other six don't have to, becuase the actions are conditional on the simultaneous action of the other six countries in the treaty, which is one possibility that "the simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open."

If each country has to wait for the others to complete their tasks first and then send this particular country the Task completion signal, then there is always the possibility that each of the countries is kept waiting for the signals from others.In this way none of the countries will have done its task,and will have the excuse that it did not receive the signal from the others.Hence C.It seems as if D is a paraphrase of the stimulus .Any good reason to eliminate D. _________________

couldn't be D, the actions were "conditional on simuptaneous (I'm assuming simultaneous) action taken by the other countries," hence, all the countries would comply at the same time and the start signal for one is the start signal for all of them. I'm going with C, because if one country does not comply, then the other six countries have "well-founded excuses, based on the provision, for their own lack of compliance." meaning that if one doesn't pull the trigger the other six don't have to, becuase the actions are conditional on the simultaneous action of the other six countries in the treaty, which is one possibility that "the simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open."

Answer: C

I thought along the similar lines and decided that for any country to start the action, that country must know that others have atleast initiated (if not finished) their part of the bargain too. Or else all the countries might keep waiting indefinetly (software professionals would remember something similar from Pressman's Software engineering book)

But now that you put it the way you do, I am of the opinion that C expresses it better. _________________

Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.

Read the question first: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

Now read the stimulus and focus on what the simultaneous action provision is. It is that each of them needs to carry out certain actions on a fixed date simultaneously. When I read this, a thought occurs to me. 'Who starts?'

Think of it this way, there are 7 people standing in a line. I say, "You all have to run simultaneously."What do you think could be an issue? Each person could stand there waiting for someone to start because they have to run [highlight]simultaneously[/highlight].

Anyway, let's go on to the options.Option (A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with this possibility. These terms of the treaty, if they do exist, are irrelevant.

(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.No relevance to the simultaneous provision.

(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.Yes, it does leave open this possibility. Each country might have a well-founded excuse which is "We didn't see others taking action, so we didn't either because we had to take actions simultaneously."

(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.Read this option along with the question stem: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action. And anyway, the simultaneous action provision specified that all the countries have to act simultaneously. It did not leave open the possibility that one country could initiate after receiving completion signal from another.

(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with ambiguity with respect to end date.

Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.

Read the question first: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

Now read the stimulus and focus on what the simultaneous action provision is. It is that each of them needs to carry out certain actions on a fixed date simultaneously. When I read this, a thought occurs to me. 'Who starts?'

Think of it this way, there are 7 people standing in a line. I say, "You all have to run simultaneously."What do you think could be an issue? Each person could stand there waiting for someone to start because they have to run [highlight]simultaneously[/highlight].

Anyway, let's go on to the options.Option (A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with this possibility. These terms of the treaty, if they do exist, are irrelevant.

(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.No relevance to the simultaneous provision.

(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.Yes, it does leave open this possibility. Each country might have a well-founded excuse which is "We didn't see others taking action, so we didn't either because we had to take actions simultaneously."

(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.Read this option along with the question stem: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action. And anyway, the simultaneous action provision specified that all the countries have to act simultaneously. It did not leave open the possibility that one country could initiate after receiving completion signal from another.

(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with ambiguity with respect to end date.

Answer (C)

karishma dont u think D is a paraphrase of the stimulus _________________

Stimulus says: All 7 had to perform specified actions on a fixed date simultaneously. Each country was to notify six others when it had completed its action.

(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.

D says that one country initiated its actions only after it received a signal from other countries that they had completed their actions. This is against the simultaneous specification of the treaty mentioned in the stimulus. _________________